metsfan Posted April 3, 2009 Share #26 Posted April 3, 2009 Well to make a say a train of R44 and R46's 9 cars you would have to take an A car and change the coupler. It's doable because all the SIRT R44's are single units. Same can be done for the SMEE cars. Split apart a married pair and put a regular coupler on the C/R end. Btw, what the hell are the styles of couplers called on the NYC subway? All I know is that I've never seen them on another system. At least the older cars, I think the NTT's share couplers with other systems. NTT have automatic couplers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling_(railway)#Fully_automatic_couplings They share a similar design idea to the BSI & budd pin/cup connector. In contrast, the HBLR uses a Scharfenberg type design. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbirdbassist Posted April 3, 2009 Share #27 Posted April 3, 2009 Ah, thanks for the info. No here is what ticks me off. Did they just forget about the ? Which is a lot more crowded, all of the time? I mean I don't think Supthin Blvd and Jamaica-Van Wyck can hold 11 cars, but I'm pretty sure Jamaica Center can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted April 3, 2009 Share #28 Posted April 3, 2009 Jamacia Center is only 627' long so in can't hold an 11 car train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbirdbassist Posted April 3, 2009 Share #29 Posted April 3, 2009 Jamacia Center is only 627' long so in can't hold an 11 car train. Ah, well if they rebuilt the main entrance (East end of the station) they could squeeze in another 33ft. Honestly that station is so, so horrible with passenger flow its ridiculous. A walkway that extended up and over the platform/tracks (similar to Jamaica Van Wyck) things would work so much better. It's a bottle neck ever rush hour. I'm gonna post my thoughts on the whole Archer Ext in a new thread, for now back to the 11 car deal. Anyone catch a glimpse of the test train? or any idea what cars they used for this? Since it started at Church Ave I guess we can assume the mods were done there, but to what cars? R32-42? Or can the NTT really be coupled into a ABBA-ABBBA setup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted April 3, 2009 Share #30 Posted April 3, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted April 3, 2009 Share #31 Posted April 3, 2009 Since they are saying 11-cars... Obviously, they are going to test it with a R-32, R-40M/42 or R-160... They cant test with any SMEE cars unless they want a 12 car train. You can't have a SMEE car (R32-42) operate with out its mate. Someone did post a pic of the train being tested on the line and it was a train of R160s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Vandelay Posted April 3, 2009 Share #32 Posted April 3, 2009 With smees there are a number of possible ways to do this. 6 Married Pairs and an R68 Quad gives you 11 cars... You could split any SMEE pair and stick a single car in the middle of the train(Yes, it DOES work. This was done all the time with R26-27-28-30s which had couplers on their #2 ends. R30s were mated to R16s on occasion, R26s with R12s, ETC. Rare, but could be done and was done.) Neither is relevant to what actually did happen (5 and 6 car R160 units.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSmith Posted April 3, 2009 Share #33 Posted April 3, 2009 Ah, well if they rebuilt the main entrance (East end of the station) they could squeeze in another 33ft. Honestly that station is so, so horrible with passenger flow its ridiculous. A walkway that extended up and over the platform/tracks (similar to Jamaica Van Wyck) things would work so much better. It's a bottle neck ever rush hour. I'm gonna post my thoughts on the whole Archer Ext in a new thread, for now back to the 11 car deal. 11-car to alleviate overcrowding on the line is what through me. Have they given up on the which seems to be the most severe and in need of addressing. Where is the anywhere as bad as the ? The answer may be in signals, long trains will require lots of construction and delays while constructing. Modern signals for the Queens Express lines is what is needed. In some cases, like Archer Av., construction is needed for passenger flow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Posted April 3, 2009 Share #34 Posted April 3, 2009 This test train tested for one night and was considered a COMPLETE failure. The experiment is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted April 3, 2009 Share #35 Posted April 3, 2009 This test train tested for one night and was considered a COMPLETE failure. The experiment is over. What was so bad about it? Brakes? Time to enter stations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted April 3, 2009 Share #36 Posted April 3, 2009 Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.1; en-us; dream) AppleWebKit/525.10+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0.4 Mobile Safari/523.12.2) Since I'm doing a refresher here at JYD, I just remembered to ask car equipment about it, and they said it was a 160 with a 6th car added (like they're supposed to do on the ). It's on the other end at CIYD, however. Don't know which set, but they di say it was one of the JYD assigned cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted April 3, 2009 Share #37 Posted April 3, 2009 This test train tested for one night and was considered a COMPLETE failure. The experiment is over. Well thats the end of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Posted April 3, 2009 Share #38 Posted April 3, 2009 What was so bad about it? Brakes? Time to enter stations? The train is to long for most of the stations. They are not going to make all of the stations in the system longer. Remember that trains get rerouted almost daily so the train would have to fit in the stations other than just on the F line. The management that I talked to said that it was a disaster but this is the TA so we'll see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbirdbassist Posted April 3, 2009 Share #39 Posted April 3, 2009 I think the funny thing is I'm almost positive they knew most of the station weren't long enough and wen't through with it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Posted April 3, 2009 Share #40 Posted April 3, 2009 I think the funny thing is I'm almost positive they knew most of the station weren't long enough and wen't through with it anyway. That's correct, it was all for show to act like they are trying to do something that may benefit the riders. They could have easily sent out a couple of people with tape measures and let them stand at the end of the platform and see how much room is in the back with a 600 ft train in the station. The TA like's to pretend that they care about the needs of the riders but actually they have proven time and time again that they don't. There actions scream out "we don't care what our riders say or think!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tbirdbassist Posted April 3, 2009 Share #41 Posted April 3, 2009 Going from the words of a lot of employees as of late, they apparently don't care and have never cared about the employees either. Which sucks cause I grew up wanting to work for the MTA... now not so much. It's a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Posted April 3, 2009 Share #42 Posted April 3, 2009 Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20) Going from the words of a lot of employees as of late, they apparently don't care and have never cared about the employees either. Which sucks cause I grew up wanting to work for the MTA... now not so much. It's a shame. The MTA doesn't care about it's riders but the TA hates it's own employees. The other branches of the MTA don't share the same employee/ management philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 3, 2009 Share #43 Posted April 3, 2009 While some stations could fit 11 cars (like my home station, East Broadway), the T/O has to be VERY careful with the train, in order to not stop short or overshoot the train, so that every door can open. And it's a tough process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Posted April 3, 2009 Share #44 Posted April 3, 2009 Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20) While some stations could fit 11 cars (like my home station, East Broadway), the T/O has to be VERY careful with the train, in order to not stop short or overshoot the train, so that every door can open. And it's a tough process. It really doesn't matter if some stations can fit 11 cars, it's all or nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 3, 2009 Share #45 Posted April 3, 2009 Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20) It really doesn't matter if some stations can fit 11 cars, it's all or nothing. Yeah that's true. And the MTA is not going to extend all the stations to 660'+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Vandelay Posted April 3, 2009 Share #46 Posted April 3, 2009 I wouldnt assume that these tests have been failures yet. On the other hand, I certainly would assume that they will turn out to be failures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 3, 2009 Share #47 Posted April 3, 2009 I wouldnt assume that these tests have been failures yet. On the other hand, I certainly would assume that they will turn out to be failures. Well what's the point of having a train that can't open ALL of its doors? Besides, it's probably not just the station length. It can also depend on curve radii. And the signalling is probably altered because of longer control lengths. (Correct me on this one, if I am wrong) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jah Posted April 3, 2009 Share #48 Posted April 3, 2009 I wouldnt assume that these tests have been failures yet. On the other hand, I certainly would assume that they will turn out to be failures. I am not assuming that the test was a failure I'm just repeating what was told to me by the manager in charge of the test train that night and the TSS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted April 3, 2009 Share #49 Posted April 3, 2009 Well what's the point of having a train that can't open ALL of its doors?Besides, it's probably not just the station length. It can also depend on curve radii. And the signalling is probably altered because of longer control lengths. (Correct me on this one, if I am wrong) If signals on the IND stations have not been moved, then I don't think the signal system would have a problem, but seeing as how its been over 50 years since 11 car trains ran on the IND, I have not idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTR Admiralty Posted April 3, 2009 Share #50 Posted April 3, 2009 If signals on the IND stations have not been moved, then I don't think the signal system would have a problem, but seeing as how its been over 50 years since 11 car trains ran on the IND, I have not idea. I believe the signals are in the same position. But say the 11 car train passes over Signal A, will the other train behind it has to wait longer so that the signal can clear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.